Chemistry Understanding the Properties of Water at 104.45°

  • Thread starter Thread starter msadoti
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Properties Water
AI Thread Summary
Water has an angle of 104.45° due to the sp3 hybridization of the oxygen atom and the greater repulsion from non-bonding electron pairs compared to bonding pairs. The divergence from the expected 109.47° angle is attributed to the delocalization of lone pairs, which causes the bond angle to be smaller. Recent insights suggest that the 2s orbital may remain unhybridized, contributing to the observed angle through steric repulsion from hydrogen atoms. This understanding enhances the explanation of water's molecular geometry. The discussion highlights the complexity of water's structure and the factors influencing its bond angles.
msadoti
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Why does water angled 104.45° ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because the O-atom is sp3 hybridized, and the repulsion from non-bonding electron pairs is greater than that from bonding electron pairs.
 
Gokul - good answer. But it doesn't totally explain the divergence of the 104.45 degree angle from the expected 109.47 degree angle - this explains why (I think):

http://xnet.rrc.mb.ca/rcharney/The%20water%20molecule.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jim, the divergence was traditionally explained in terms of a greater delocalization of the lone pairs causing the bond angle to be smaller that the symmetric angle - this is what I stated above. However, the information in your reference suggests there is now good reason to believe that in fact, the 2s orbital is unhybridized and the 105 deg = 90 deg + steric repulsion from H atoms.

Thanks for the link.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top